Its a plinker load.

Plinker load . . .
 

I wouldn't term it a plinker load, but if you do, then surely the less-energetic .54 230 Gr roundball load propelled by 120 Gr of GOEX FFg must fall into the same category. Even more so than the XTP. One poster mentioned getting complete pass throughs with roundballs, except for one that caught a rib. Good guess is that none of them expanded. Also reported was a shooter recovering roundballs from a target backstop, none of which were significantly deformed. Sounds like no expansion to me.

In contrast, the XTP line of bullets are designed to provide 1 1/2 calibers of expansion within the listed expansion range, with the middle velocity probably adhering most closely to that criteria. That would yield a frontal area about the size of a 16 gauge shotgun, which is 150% of one of the unexpanded .54 roundballs. The XTP would expend a greater amount of its energy inside the target, while creating a noticeably larger wound channel.

XTP: its just a better bullet! If you have any factual data to refute that statement, please enlighten us. So far, we haven't seen anything in that vein from you. All you've been doing is driving up our post count, but with no content on your part.

OldBob

not at all, 120gr 2f is a big time hunting load for elk. My elk load is 100gr goex 2fg right now. Took one years ago with an 80gr pyro rs charge at 140 yards with a single shot.

Have you shot anything living with this 60gr 230gr xtp load?

Ballistics
 

It appears all you have to offer is anecdotal experience, with no scientific basis. No, I have not shot anything with the 60 Gr load. You recommended it to me in post #18, albeit with an inferior projectile. Don't you stand behind your advice? As I said toward the beginning, I am building a load for my grandaughter, should she desire to hunt. I was expecting, hoping, that someone could tell me why the direction I was taking was not a good idea, and show me why.

Do you know anyone here who is a ballistics expert? If so, please ask them to read this thread so that they might respond to my questions. Take a close look at your "Elk" load; it is less powerful than the load I am exploring, or the load you recommended in post #18, once you dump the roundball.

OldBob

scientific? for hunting? Good grief you really need to learn to loosen up and enjoy life.

Go out and get some hunts under your belt. Rookies like you come in here all the time what all that book knowledge and how much you've read.

Now now boys. Don't get snippy.

But Semi! Round Balls can't kill animals because its to simple and the numbers don't at up to todays scientific theories we have these days. Same with powerbelts dont ya know.

Rookie?
 

Ah, I've enjoyed nearly 69 years of life. And I do love books. The internet is also useful. Google "230 XTP in muzzleloaders" and lots of interesting archives come up. One in particular caught my eye, a dialogue between you and a poster named "Confederate rifleman" on modernmuzzleloader.com. He recounts his experience with . . . wait for it, a 230 XTP . . .pushed by 60 Gr of FFFg . . .at a MV of 1450. He said it blew the chest up, and you said. "Sounds like it did the job." The years have not been kind to this load, though, as apparently this once-effective game harvester is now merely a plinking load.

I'd bet your eyes are brown.

OldBob

everyone gets lucky once in a while. If you want to shoot plinker loads, be my guest. I doubt you've even shot a round ball or any muzzle loader at an animal with all the scientific stuff you are coming up with. That or you are stirring up trouble under another name.

I'm not mad, just disappointed.
 

Semisane,
I just came here for information, trying to understand why anyone would use a lead roundball when the state of the art passed them by so long ago. What I ended up getting for answers were a bunch of hunting stories, all of them boasting great success (no failures, of course). I could understand it if most places were regulation-limited, requiring the use of a roundball, as PA once did. If roundballs were so uniformly effective, there would have been no pressure to amend the regulations, and all the bullet-making companies would not be competing to come up with better mousetraps. I've done a lot of homework on this, and in years past, shot a lot of newspapers. One thing I found with cartridge arms was there wasn't necessarily that much difference in calibers (.30-'06 vs .270, anyone?), but you darn well better select the most appropriate bullet for the intended usage. I think that is even more important with traditional muzzleloaders. Hence my frustration at getting no answers.
OldBob